Supreme Court reverses acquittal of police inspector who leaked prosecutor’s directive in son’s case
Published: 01 Aug. 2025, 21:30
![The Supreme Court in Seocho District, southern Seoul on May 14. [YONHAP]](https://koreaseafood.online/data/photo/2025/08/01/37b38611-f3e8-462d-8117-e4ed8b64dfc2.jpg)
The Supreme Court in Seocho District, southern Seoul on May 14. [YONHAP]
A police inspector who told his son not to worry about being arrested, after reviewing a prosecutor’s directive in his son’s case, now has cause for concern himself, according to the Supreme Court.
The top court on Friday overturned a lower-court ruling that had acquitted the officer of leaking official secrets. The officer had informed his son, who was under investigation at the same police station, about the contents of a prosecutor’s investigative directive.
The case hinged on whether disclosing that the directive contained no mention of pretrial detention constituted a breach of official confidentiality.
The Supreme Court ruled that it did, saying the lower courts had misunderstood the legal definition of an “official secret.” It sent the case back to the Uijeongbu District Court for retrial. The officer had previously been acquitted in both district and appeals court proceedings.
In May 2020, the officer was serving as the inspector general at a police station in Gyeonggi when his son became a suspect in a fraud case. Concerned by his son’s report that the complainant had posted online that the son would be arrested soon, the officer requested and obtained the case file and the prosecutor’s directive through an administrative officer in the investigation support team.
Upon reviewing the materials, the officer confirmed that the directive contained no instructions regarding detention. He then called his son to reassure him, saying, “There is no arrest warrant and no mention of detention in the prosecutor’s directive, so you don’t need to worry.”
Prosecutors later charged the officer with abuse of power and leaking official secrets.
However, in November 2022, the lower court acquitted him of both charges. The court ruled that the officer’s request for the documents did not amount to an abuse of power because it was framed as a personal favor and not conducted under the formal appearance of his official duties.
It also noted that the officer had disclosed his personal connection to the case and that the administrative officer understood the request did not pertain to the inspector general’s regular duties.
Regarding the leak of official secrets, the court determined that the information shared by the officer to his son was limited to the fact that the directive instructed “polygraph tests for those who consent,” and did not touch on the suspect’s custody.
Therefore, it concluded that the officer’s comment — “There is no mention of detention, so don’t worry” — did not constitute a disclosure of investigative details.
![An illustration of a police officer [JOONGANG ILBO]](https://koreaseafood.online/data/photo/2025/08/01/1c1e93c0-1561-4204-8e13-29597b3b6c26.jpg)
An illustration of a police officer [JOONGANG ILBO]
The appeals court upheld this ruling. However, the Supreme Court partially overturned the verdict. While it agreed that the abuse of power charge did not apply, it found fault with the acquittal on the charge of leaking official secrets.
“The information that ‘the prosecutor did not issue instructions regarding custody’ is, in itself, a meaningful insight into the direction of the investigation,” The Supreme Court said. “It allows inferences about whether the prosecution is considering pretrial detention.”
The justices added that even seemingly innocuous information can impair the function of criminal investigations if it becomes known externally, allowing suspects to infer the seriousness of the charges and tailor their legal strategy accordingly.
“Thus, the information cannot be considered unrelated to the prosecutor’s directive,” the ruling said.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that by confirming and disclosing the contents of an investigative directive while his own son was under investigation, the officer had undermined the fairness and credibility of the investigation. It concluded that such actions pose a risk to the integrity of the criminal justice system and sent the case back for retrial on the charge of leaking official secrets.
Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.
BY KIM JUN-YOUNG [[email protected]]
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.
Standards Board Policy (0/250자)